From: Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: RAID 10 Benchmark with different I/O schedulers
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 11:30:26 -0700
Message-ID: <4820A3C2.4000307@emolecules.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0805052354120.3752@westnet.com>
References: <D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C201FA62C8@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at>
<C050E63A-2209-4E89-AA99-6A327CCE7380@torgo.978.org>
<Pine.LNX.4.64.0804111736580.20402@aragorn.flymine.org>
<47FFA7FF.10801@postnewspapers.com.au>
<544D07A2-EB3F-4D91-A749-0C4D5D38AB80@gmail.com>
<481F992D.7070509@emolecules.com>
<Pine.GSO.4.64.0805052354120.3752@westnet.com>
Greg Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 5 May 2008, Craig James wrote:
>
>> pgbench -i -s 20 -U test
>
> That's way too low to expect you'll see a difference in I/O schedulers.
> A scale of 20 is giving you a 320MB database, you can fit the whole
> thing in RAM and almost all of it on your controller cache. What's
> there to schedule? You're just moving between buffers that are
> generally large enough to hold most of what they need.
Test repeated with:
autovacuum enabled
database destroyed and recreated between runs
pgbench -i -s 600 ...
pgbench -c 10 -t 50000 -n ...
I/O Sched AVG Test1 Test2
--------- ----- ----- -----
cfq 705 695 715
noop 758 769 747
deadline 741 705 775
anticipatory 494 477 511
I only did two runs of each, which took about 24 minutes. Like the first round of tests, the "noise" in the measurements (about 10%) exceeds the difference between scheduler-algorithm performance, except that "anticipatory" seems to be measurably slower.
So it still looks like cfq, noop and deadline are more or less equivalent when used with a battery-backed RAID.
Craig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: craig_james@emolecules.com, gsmith@gregsmith.com
Subject: Re: RAID 10 Benchmark with different I/O schedulers
In-Reply-To: <4820A3C2.4000307@emolecules.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox